APITestGenie: Generating Web API Tests from Requirements and API Specifications with LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02039v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 13:43:56 GMT
• Title: APITestGenie: Generating Web API Tests from Requirements and API Specifications with LLMs
• Abstract summary: APITestGenie is a novel tool that automatically generates API integration tests directly from business requirements and OpenAPI specifications.<n>The tool was able to generate syntactically and semantically valid test scripts for 89% of the business requirements under test after at most three attempts.<n>Some generated tests revealed previously unknown defects in the APIs, including integration issues between endpoints.
• Score: 0.6445087473595952
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Modern software systems rely heavily on Web APIs, yet creating meaningful and executable test scripts remains a largely manual, time-consuming, and error-prone task. In this paper, we present APITestGenie, a novel tool that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and prompt engineering to automatically generate API integration tests directly from business requirements and OpenAPI specifications. We evaluated APITestGenie on 10 real-world APIs, including 8 APIs comprising circa 1,000 live endpoints from an industrial partner in the automotive domain. The tool was able to generate syntactically and semantically valid test scripts for 89\% of the business requirements under test after at most three attempts. Notably, some generated tests revealed previously unknown defects in the APIs, including integration issues between endpoints. Statistical analysis identified API complexity and level of detail in business requirements as primary factors influencing success rates, with the level of detail in API documentation also affecting outcomes. Feedback from industry practitioners confirmed strong interest in adoption, substantially reducing the manual effort in writing acceptance tests, and improving the alignment between tests and business requirements.

Related papers

• Environment-free Synthetic Data Generation for API-Calling Agents [68.95520739708304]
  Training API-calling large language model (LLM) agents demands massive amounts of high-quality trajectories.<n>We propose an environment-free synthetic data generation approach that leverages LLMs as on-the-fly digital world models.<n>We evaluate our approach on the challenging AppWorld and OfficeBench benchmarks, which include both information-retrieval and state-changing tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-18T17:36:44Z)
• AISE-Bench: A Full-Cycle Curated Benchmark for Information Seeking on Academic Knowledge Graphs [55.8213573429699]
  AISE-Bench is a real-world, full-cycle annotated benchmark for information seeking on academic knowledge graphs.<n>AISE-Bench release contains 1,133 QA pairs, including query, full API execution, validated parameters, and source-grounded answers with reference links.<n>We develop a comprehensive evaluation protocol measuring answer quality, reference grounding, API-planning correctness, and execution success.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T07:59:46Z)
• Benchmarking Web API Integration Code Generation [3.5669873833301047]
  We present WAPIIBench, a dataset and evaluation pipeline designed to assess the ability of LLMs to generate web API invocation code.<n>Our experiments with several open-source LLMs reveal that generating API invocations poses a significant challenge.<n>None of the evaluated open-source models was able to solve more than 40% of the tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T14:36:44Z)
• Test Amplification for REST APIs via Single and Multi-Agent LLM Systems [1.6499388997661122]
  We investigate the use of large language model (LLM) systems, both single-agent and multi-agent setups, for amplifying existing REST API test suites.<n>We present a comparative evaluation of the two approaches across several dimensions, including test coverage, bug detection effectiveness, and practical considerations such as computational cost and energy usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T20:19:50Z)
• Utilizing API Response for Test Refinement [2.8002188463519944]
  This paper proposes a dynamic test refinement approach that leverages the response message.<n>Using an intelligent agent, the approach adds constraints to the API specification that are further used to generate a test scenario.<n>The proposed approach led to a decrease in the number of 4xx responses, taking a step closer to generating more realistic test cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T05:26:32Z)
• LlamaRestTest: Effective REST API Testing with Small Language Models [50.058600784556816]
  We present LlamaRestTest, a novel approach that employs two custom Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate realistic test inputs.<n>We evaluate it against several state-of-the-art REST API testing tools, including RESTGPT, a GPT-powered specification-enhancement tool.<n>Our study shows that small language models can perform as well as, or better than, large language models in REST API testing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T05:51:20Z)
• ExploraCoder: Advancing code generation for multiple unseen APIs via planning and chained exploration [70.26807758443675]
  ExploraCoder is a training-free framework that empowers large language models to invoke unseen APIs in code solution.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that ExploraCoder significantly improves performance for models lacking prior API knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T19:00:15Z)
• A Multi-Agent Approach for REST API Testing with Semantic Graphs and LLM-Driven Inputs [46.65963514391019]
  We present AutoRestTest, the first black-box tool to adopt a dependency-embedded multi-agent approach for REST API testing.<n>Our approach treats REST API testing as a separable problem, where four agents collaborate to optimize API exploration.<n>Our evaluation of AutoRestTest on 12 real-world REST services shows that it outperforms the four leading black-box REST API testing tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T16:20:27Z)
• APITestGenie: Automated API Test Generation through Generative AI [2.0716352593701277]
  APITestGenie generates executable API test scripts from business requirements and API specifications. In experiments with 10 real-world APIs, the tool generated valid test scripts 57% of the time. Human intervention is recommended to validate or refine generated scripts before integration into CI/CD pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-05T18:02:41Z)
• KAT: Dependency-aware Automated API Testing with Large Language Models [1.7264233311359707]
  KAT (Katalon API Testing) is a novel AI-driven approach that autonomously generates test cases to validate APIs. Our evaluation of KAT using 12 real-world services shows that it can improve validation coverage, detect more undocumented status codes, and reduce false positives in these services.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-14T14:48:18Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models to Improve REST API Testing [51.284096009803406]
  RESTGPT takes as input an API specification, extracts machine-interpretable rules, and generates example parameter values from natural-language descriptions in the specification. Our evaluations indicate that RESTGPT outperforms existing techniques in both rule extraction and value generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-01T19:53:23Z)
• Carving UI Tests to Generate API Tests and API Specification [8.743426215048451]
  API-level testing can play an important role, in-between unit-level testing and UI-level (or end-to-end) testing. Existing API testing tools require API specifications, which often may not be available or, when available, be inconsistent with the API implementation. We present an approach that leverages UI testing to enable API-level testing for web applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T03:53:34Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.